Direct from the Devil
In the year 1865 a controversial individual arrived in the town of Belton, Texas, along the banks of Nolan Creek. Martha McWhirter became a voice for women’s opportunity and a polarizing figure due to her religious beliefs. She created the Woman’s Commonwealth of Belton in 1870. Known as the Sanctified Sisters, the commune became the most controversial group in Central Texas due to the group's Pentecostal conversions and teaching of celibacy. In the group's early days the sisters created a divisive atmosphere due to their religious teachings. By the late 1880’s, however, the attitudes of the community began to change. That change was in direct correlation with the financial success of the commune.
The response to McWhirter’s group of women from the citizens of Belton evolved over time. The group met a negative and violent response in the beginning. As the women gained in numbers and financial viability the community warmed to the women. The people of Belton came full circle once McWhirter and the sisters held large land holdings and exerted influence in the business community. The evidence shows a direct link to the financial growth of the Sanctified Sisters and the overall treatment given by the citizens of Belton.
The early 1870s brought many challenges for members of the commune. In March 1877, a group of Baptist deacons held a meeting to charge the women with heresy.[i]They described McWhirter’s followers as “unchristian like” and charged them with heresy.[ii]The Reverend Martin Vanburen Smith of the Belton Baptist Church of Christ delivered the charges to McWhirter. He later described her as being gracious and engaging upon his visit.[iii] Heresy during the Victorian era in America was a serious charge. The very idea of teaching women that it was no longer their “duty to remain with their husbands and be bossed around had the possibility to incite riot.” [iv] A quote from McWhirter herself stated, “We are to come out and be the peculiar people.”[v]
Husbands grew tired of wives not fulfilling their marital duties. The practice of celibacy drove many husbands to violence and divorce. A husband by the name of John Henry went so far as to slap his wife and throw McWhirter and several other sisters out of his home, when they attempted to wash laundry there. Even McWhirter’s daughter, Ada, was not immune to the problems faced by the commune. Ada and B.W. Haymond’s divorce trial was one of the most scandalous divorce trials of that era in Texas.[vi] Dr. Adolphus Schebel described Martha as being “vile” during his divorce proceedings.[vii]
The women were besieged by violence. There was tremendous hostility toward the women. The culmination of this violence occurred in 1882. Two young Scottish men attempted to join the sanctified sisters. The Dow brothers became synonymous with the post-Civil War vigilante justice in Belton. The young men were shunned and ridiculed and given threatening letters. Forty men grabbed the Dows from their homes, led them out of town and whipped them repeatedly. [viii] The violence continued. The bullet hole seen in the door of the McWhirter home on Pearl Street is a reminder of just how violent and unsupportive the people of Belton truly were.
As the sisters endured, the attitudes of the people of Belton began to change. The women became more self-sufficient as time went on. The commune grew as women became increasingly unhappy with their home lives. Ranging between thirty to fifty members at its height the women slowly began to support themselves. They sold eggs, washed clothing, and requested payment from their husbands for domestic duties performed. The women built small houses and farmed small plots to sell produce. McWhirter’s commune eventually inherited property from deceased husbands. The sisters opened boarding houses. As their holdings grew and their economic contribution to the community increased, the citizens began to change. George McWhirter gave an interview to Neal Ramey of the Texian in 1883 describing the local press as “misunderstanding” his wife.[ix] In the year 1886 the Central Hotel and Laundry opened. This was the true catalyst for the change in Belton's treatment of the sisters.
The year 1886 marked the beginning of McWhirter’s success as an entrepreneur. Starting a hotel was difficult to say the least. The town people worked pretty effectively against them. [x] As noted by Garrison, outsiders quickly passed judgment on the women after conversing with the locals. The women were diligent about maintaining separation from the unsanctified. For some unknown reason in 1887 the Hotel began to turn around. There were an average of fifteen to thirty patrons a night. In 1891 the hotel incorporated and formed the Central Hotel Association. As McWhirter and her followers holdings grew so did their influence. McWhirter was asked to join the Belton Board of Trade. She contributed $500 dollars toward the building of a rail station in Belton. The sisters contributed to and encouraged the building of an Opera house across from the newly-built courthouse. Coincidentally, the Dow brothers helped build the courthouse.[xi] The Central Hotel and Restaurant were so successful they often turned people away. With the success of the Central Hotel, McWhirter leased the Royal Hotel in Waco. At its height in Belton, the commune had $200,000 in holdings, one fourth of which was in real estate.[xii]
The obvious conclusion is that with financial success the Sanctified Sisters became an accepted group in the frontier town of Belton. It was not all roses for McWhirter and her followers. There were times when it was be difficult to collect rent. Collecting on debts owed to the women was difficult as well. Just when the sisters had become successful members of the community, they decided to leave Central Texas. When their move was announced and the sale of their properties was imminent, the men of the community could not resist the opportunity to devalue their properties at least twenty five percent in some cases.[xiii]
From its inception, McWhirter’s Sanctified Sisters faced numerous challenges. The post-Civil War attitudes toward change were challenging in their own right. What this group of women were able to accomplish financially and socially was remarkable. Perhaps Ann Ruff’s book describes best how the people of Belton felt about the women: "Of course the town was split wide open over the rising number of sancties. The only thing they agreed on was that it never would have happened if it hadn’t been for Martha McWhirter."[xiv]
Ironically, a newspaper account reported that in the end, Belton was sorry to see the Sanctified Sisters go and “Nothing succeeds like success.” Whether the community of Belton would ever acknowledge the facts is irrelevant. The Sanctified Sisters and McWhirter were first rejected and only accepted when there was an economic benefit for the community.
Endnotes
[i]Lufburrow, Debra. 2001. Set Apart: The Sanctified Sisters of Belton: A True Story. S.l.: [The Author],69-70
[ii]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[iii]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[iv]Wright, G. 1974. “The Women’s Common Wealth: Separation, Self, Sharing.” The Architectural Quarterly (6): Wright, G.
[v]Wright, G. “A Women’s Common Wealth”
[vi]Direct from the Devil: a Former Citizen of Belton Granted Divorce on Grounds of Cruel Treatment and
Abandonment. (1887, December 17).Fort Worth Daily Gazette.
[vii] Lufburrow, Set Apart, 63
[viii]Miller, Rick, and Bell County Museum (Tex.). 2011. Bloody Bell County : vignettes of violence and mayhem in Central Texas. [Texas]: Bell County Museum.
[ix]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[x]Garrison, G.P. 1893. “A Woman’s Community in Texas.” The Charities Review: A Journal of Practical Sociology III (November).
[xi]Miller, Rick, and Bell County Museum (Tex.). 2011. Bloody Bell County : vignettes of violence and mayhem in Central Texas. [Texas]: Bell County Museum.
[xii]Wright, G. “A Women’s Common Wealth”. 37-38
[xiii] Kitch, Sally. 1993. This strange society of women : reading the letters and lives of the Woman’s
Commonwealth. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. p. 83
[xiv]Ruff, Ann. 1985. Unsung heroes of Texas : stories of courage and honor from Texas history and
legend. Houston, Tex.: Lone Star Books. p. 46
The response to McWhirter’s group of women from the citizens of Belton evolved over time. The group met a negative and violent response in the beginning. As the women gained in numbers and financial viability the community warmed to the women. The people of Belton came full circle once McWhirter and the sisters held large land holdings and exerted influence in the business community. The evidence shows a direct link to the financial growth of the Sanctified Sisters and the overall treatment given by the citizens of Belton.
The early 1870s brought many challenges for members of the commune. In March 1877, a group of Baptist deacons held a meeting to charge the women with heresy.[i]They described McWhirter’s followers as “unchristian like” and charged them with heresy.[ii]The Reverend Martin Vanburen Smith of the Belton Baptist Church of Christ delivered the charges to McWhirter. He later described her as being gracious and engaging upon his visit.[iii] Heresy during the Victorian era in America was a serious charge. The very idea of teaching women that it was no longer their “duty to remain with their husbands and be bossed around had the possibility to incite riot.” [iv] A quote from McWhirter herself stated, “We are to come out and be the peculiar people.”[v]
Husbands grew tired of wives not fulfilling their marital duties. The practice of celibacy drove many husbands to violence and divorce. A husband by the name of John Henry went so far as to slap his wife and throw McWhirter and several other sisters out of his home, when they attempted to wash laundry there. Even McWhirter’s daughter, Ada, was not immune to the problems faced by the commune. Ada and B.W. Haymond’s divorce trial was one of the most scandalous divorce trials of that era in Texas.[vi] Dr. Adolphus Schebel described Martha as being “vile” during his divorce proceedings.[vii]
The women were besieged by violence. There was tremendous hostility toward the women. The culmination of this violence occurred in 1882. Two young Scottish men attempted to join the sanctified sisters. The Dow brothers became synonymous with the post-Civil War vigilante justice in Belton. The young men were shunned and ridiculed and given threatening letters. Forty men grabbed the Dows from their homes, led them out of town and whipped them repeatedly. [viii] The violence continued. The bullet hole seen in the door of the McWhirter home on Pearl Street is a reminder of just how violent and unsupportive the people of Belton truly were.
As the sisters endured, the attitudes of the people of Belton began to change. The women became more self-sufficient as time went on. The commune grew as women became increasingly unhappy with their home lives. Ranging between thirty to fifty members at its height the women slowly began to support themselves. They sold eggs, washed clothing, and requested payment from their husbands for domestic duties performed. The women built small houses and farmed small plots to sell produce. McWhirter’s commune eventually inherited property from deceased husbands. The sisters opened boarding houses. As their holdings grew and their economic contribution to the community increased, the citizens began to change. George McWhirter gave an interview to Neal Ramey of the Texian in 1883 describing the local press as “misunderstanding” his wife.[ix] In the year 1886 the Central Hotel and Laundry opened. This was the true catalyst for the change in Belton's treatment of the sisters.
The year 1886 marked the beginning of McWhirter’s success as an entrepreneur. Starting a hotel was difficult to say the least. The town people worked pretty effectively against them. [x] As noted by Garrison, outsiders quickly passed judgment on the women after conversing with the locals. The women were diligent about maintaining separation from the unsanctified. For some unknown reason in 1887 the Hotel began to turn around. There were an average of fifteen to thirty patrons a night. In 1891 the hotel incorporated and formed the Central Hotel Association. As McWhirter and her followers holdings grew so did their influence. McWhirter was asked to join the Belton Board of Trade. She contributed $500 dollars toward the building of a rail station in Belton. The sisters contributed to and encouraged the building of an Opera house across from the newly-built courthouse. Coincidentally, the Dow brothers helped build the courthouse.[xi] The Central Hotel and Restaurant were so successful they often turned people away. With the success of the Central Hotel, McWhirter leased the Royal Hotel in Waco. At its height in Belton, the commune had $200,000 in holdings, one fourth of which was in real estate.[xii]
The obvious conclusion is that with financial success the Sanctified Sisters became an accepted group in the frontier town of Belton. It was not all roses for McWhirter and her followers. There were times when it was be difficult to collect rent. Collecting on debts owed to the women was difficult as well. Just when the sisters had become successful members of the community, they decided to leave Central Texas. When their move was announced and the sale of their properties was imminent, the men of the community could not resist the opportunity to devalue their properties at least twenty five percent in some cases.[xiii]
From its inception, McWhirter’s Sanctified Sisters faced numerous challenges. The post-Civil War attitudes toward change were challenging in their own right. What this group of women were able to accomplish financially and socially was remarkable. Perhaps Ann Ruff’s book describes best how the people of Belton felt about the women: "Of course the town was split wide open over the rising number of sancties. The only thing they agreed on was that it never would have happened if it hadn’t been for Martha McWhirter."[xiv]
Ironically, a newspaper account reported that in the end, Belton was sorry to see the Sanctified Sisters go and “Nothing succeeds like success.” Whether the community of Belton would ever acknowledge the facts is irrelevant. The Sanctified Sisters and McWhirter were first rejected and only accepted when there was an economic benefit for the community.
Endnotes
[i]Lufburrow, Debra. 2001. Set Apart: The Sanctified Sisters of Belton: A True Story. S.l.: [The Author],69-70
[ii]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[iii]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[iv]Wright, G. 1974. “The Women’s Common Wealth: Separation, Self, Sharing.” The Architectural Quarterly (6): Wright, G.
[v]Wright, G. “A Women’s Common Wealth”
[vi]Direct from the Devil: a Former Citizen of Belton Granted Divorce on Grounds of Cruel Treatment and
Abandonment. (1887, December 17).Fort Worth Daily Gazette.
[vii] Lufburrow, Set Apart, 63
[viii]Miller, Rick, and Bell County Museum (Tex.). 2011. Bloody Bell County : vignettes of violence and mayhem in Central Texas. [Texas]: Bell County Museum.
[ix]Lufburrow, Set Apart, 69-70
[x]Garrison, G.P. 1893. “A Woman’s Community in Texas.” The Charities Review: A Journal of Practical Sociology III (November).
[xi]Miller, Rick, and Bell County Museum (Tex.). 2011. Bloody Bell County : vignettes of violence and mayhem in Central Texas. [Texas]: Bell County Museum.
[xii]Wright, G. “A Women’s Common Wealth”. 37-38
[xiii] Kitch, Sally. 1993. This strange society of women : reading the letters and lives of the Woman’s
Commonwealth. Columbus: Ohio State University Press. p. 83
[xiv]Ruff, Ann. 1985. Unsung heroes of Texas : stories of courage and honor from Texas history and
legend. Houston, Tex.: Lone Star Books. p. 46